scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality

01 Jan 1985-The Philosophical Review (Basil Blackwell)-Vol. 83, Iss: 1, pp 142
TL;DR: Lawler as mentioned in this paper argued that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament, which is hardly a rational position in the sense that it is suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some.
Abstract: that a plurality of the American Catholic bishops endorse a nuclear freeze (p. 4), saying that they are thus "taking their stance with Moscow,55 which is for a freeze, and not with the Vatican, which "is still in favor of disarmament?not a freeze.55 To make any sense at all, Mr. Lawler must mean that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament? hardly a rational position. One recalls here the arguments, during the 19305s and 19405s, that being for racial justice in the United States was suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some, because the communists also favored it.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the effects of post-9/11 security programs on mobility into and within the United States are explored, and specific programs such as retinal scanning and vehicle preclearance are analyzed according to the differential effects they generate in terms of risk, rights and speed of movement.
Abstract: This article explores the effects of post-9/11 security programs on mobility into and within the United States. Specific programs such as retinal scanning and vehicle preclearance are analyzed according to the differential effects they generate in terms of risk, rights and speed of movement. These differentiations suggest that individuals and groups will be identified in unequal ways, and that they will in turn experience their mobility differently. In the end, the analysis provided here adds complexity to current theorizations about citizenship and identity: it shows that while individuals make claims to new and different kinds of citizenship, state power also makes claims on individuals that do not always depend on citizenship. In view of the manifest inequalities resulting from the mobility control practices currently in use, rethinking of those practices is warranted, and an emphasis on shared burdens would be more productive.

59 citations


Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."

  • ...Indeed, Michael Walzer (1983) has suggested that membership in a political community is the first and most basic “good” that a political community can give or confer, and if we bracket the normative considerations implied there, we can see that from the individual’s point of view, this membership…...

    [...]

  • ...Indeed, Michael Walzer (1983) has suggested that membership in a political community is the first and most basic “good” that a political community can give or confer, and if we bracket the normative considerations implied there, we can see that from the individual’s point of view, this membership is the first thing to be sought from the state, because attaining it is a precondition for all other benefits....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper addresses two related issues in assessing benefits and costs for health resource prioritization, should benefits be restricted only to health benefits, or include as well other non health benefits such as economic benefits to employers from reducing the lost work time due to illness of their employees?
Abstract: On any plausible account of the basis for health care resource prioritization, the benefits and costs of different alternative resource uses are relevant considerations in the prioritization process. Consequentialists hold that the maximization of benefits with available resources is the only relevant consideration. Non-consequentialists do not reject the relevance of consequences of benefits and costs, but insist that other considerations, and in particular the distribution of benefits and costs, are morally important as well. Whatever one's particular account of morally justified standards for the prioritization of different health interventions, we must be able to measure those interventions' benefits and costs. There are many theoretical and practical difficulties in that measurement, such as how to weigh extending life against improving health and quality of life as well as how different quality of life improvements should be valued, but they are not my concern here. This paper addresses two related issues in assessing benefits and costs for health resource prioritization. First, should benefits be restricted only to health benefits, or include as well other non health benefits such as economic benefits to employers from reducing the lost work time due to illness of their employees? I shall call this the Separate Spheres problem. Second, should only the direct benefits, such as extending life or reducing disability, and direct costs, such as costs of medical personnel and supplies, of health interventions be counted, or should other indirect benefits and costs be counted as well? I shall call this the Indirect Benefits problem. These two issues can have great importance for a ranking of different health interventions by either a cost/benefit or cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) standard.

58 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...Frances Kamm has suggested a different reason why giving priority to treating some patients, those in group A in the example above, because doing so will produce indirect non health benefits for third parties would be wrong – it would violate the Kantian requirement that persons always be treated as ends in themselves and never solely as means [1,8]....

    [...]

  • ...Direct Versus Indirect Benefits The separate sphere's argument has been used to somewhat different effect by different of its prominent proponents, such as Michael Walzer and Frances Kamm [1,4]....

    [...]

  • ...The Moral Significance of Separate Spheres and Direct Versus Indirect Benefits The separate sphere's argument has been used to somewhat different effect by different of its prominent proponents, such as Michael Walzer and Frances Kamm [1,4]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the recent emergence of "deliberative ecological economics", a field that highlights the potential of deliberation for improving environmental governance, and propose a research agenda for deliberative ecology.
Abstract: We discuss the recent emergence of ‗deliberative ecological economics', a field that highlights the potential of deliberation for improving environmental governance. We locate the emergence of this literature in the long concern in ecological economics over the policy implications of limited views of human action and its encounter with deliberative democracy scholarship and the model of communicative rationality as an alternative to utilitarianism. Considering criticisms over methods used and the focus of research in deliberative decision-making, we put forward a research agenda for deliberative ecological economics. Given the promising potential of deliberative processes for improving the effectiveness and legitimacy of environmental decision-making, work in this area could help advance both theory and practice in environmental governance.

58 citations


Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."

  • ...Habermas [37] (see also Walzer [38]) considered the influence of instrumental action upon the democratic potential of...

    [...]

  • ...Habermas (1984; see also Walzer, 1983) considered the influence of instrumental action upon the democratic potential of institutions, associating the degradation of the democratic potential of major spheres of social life (e.g. state, social organisations, etc.) to their being taken over by models of strategic and instrumental rationality....

    [...]

  • ...Habermas (1984; see also Walzer, 1983) considered the influence of instrumental action upon the democratic potential of institutions, associating the degradation of the democratic potential of major spheres of social life (e.g. state, social organisations, etc.) to their being taken over by models…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a critical and constructive engage ment with discourse ethics is presented, where the goal is the elaboration of an ethics that is able to incorporate the material aspects of goods and the formal dimension of ethical validity and consensuability.
Abstract: This contribution is a critical and constructive engage ment with discourse ethics. First, it clarifies why discourse ethics has difficulties with the grounding and application of moral norms. Second, it turns to a positive appropriation of the formal and proce dural aspects of discourse ethics. The goal is the elaboration of an ethics that is able to incorporate the material aspects of goods and the formal dimension of ethical validity and consensuability. Every morality is the formal application of some substantive good. Every ethical perspective demands its evaluation in terms of its uni versability. In order to achieve this mediation, it is suggested that we must incorporate not only the historical dimension of moral systems, but also the role of critical consciousness and the negativity embod ied by those who are victims of the existing consensus. The essay con cludes with six points that need to be considered when formulating a material ethics that is universalizable and, most importantly, that can ...

57 citations


Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."

  • ...3 The 'spheres' of justice (Walzer, 1983) are now transformed into the 'fronts' of 'struggle for recognition' (even more radical than that noted by Honneth, 1992)....

    [...]

  • ...There are also those that describe some spheres of justice like Walzer (1983); and those of the Hegelian Sittlichkeit; etc....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The field of public management scholarship has yet to make a similar commitment to the democratic ethos, despite some contemporary practices (flattened hierarchies, self-managing teams) that represent democratization in public organizations.
Abstract: One of the few issues on which public management scholars agree in theory is the centrality of the democratic ethos. Public policy has recently paid attention to more democratic forms of policy making (e.g., participatory policy analysis), and public administration has periodically studied and advocated increased citizen participation in the processes of government. But the field of public management scholarship has yet to make a similar commitment to the democratic ethos, despite some contemporary practices (flattened hierarchies, self-managing teams) that represent democratization in public organizations. This essay reviews reasons why public management should be more democratic, some ways in which it is not, and proposes some ways in which the focus of scholarship and practice should be directed.

57 citations


Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."

  • ...Michael Walzer (1983) clearly agreed with Denhardt when he insisted that organizations must practice democracy as a reflection of distributive justice; indeed, he goes so far as to suggest that employees are entitled to select their own managers, just as citizens elect their own leaders....

    [...]